| Author |
Message |
gabor ferenczy (gabor)
New member
Username: gabor
Post Number: 1
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 03:02 am: |   |
Hi everybody.
I would like to know what the main visible difference on the pictures between
Leica zoom against Canon L zoom ?
Thanks for help
Gabor
|
pkn (plk)
Senior Member
Username: plk
Post Number: 1276
Registered: 07-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 03:16 am: | |
the leica r line is decades behind nikon and canon, wrt vr/is and the cost is simply not worth is |
Jan Dvorak (Vancouver, Canada) (doubice)
Senior Member
Username: doubice
Post Number: 390
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 06:03 am: | |
Servus Gabor,
Maybe you should be more specific as to which Leica zoom and which Canon zoom. Than you might get answers more specific than the one above.....
I am sure there are Canon zoom lens users here, pkn is not among them.
Jan |
John Francis (john_f)
Senior Member
Username: john_f
Post Number: 1156
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 06:43 am: | |
Hello Gabor,
Welcome to the Leica forum! To give you a fair answer, I think we should first keep in mind that there are a LOT more zoom lenses available from Canon than from Leica. So comparing Leica zoom lenses with Canon zoom lenses is somewhat problematic as there are many Canon zoom lenses for which there is no Leica equivalent. Furthermore, as PKN correctly pointed out, Leica lenses do not include the latest modern features such as IS/VR (image stabilization), nor are they autofocus (no USM or AF/S).
Traditionally, Ernst Leitz preferred to concentrate on the design of fixed focal length lenses, not zoom lenses. The (old) argument being that maximum quality could not be obtained with zoom lenses (which, IMHO, is no longer true). Over the years, Leitz (now Leica Camera) outsourced the design and manufacturing of several zoom lenses to its partners (first Minolta and Angénieux, then Sigma, and now Kyocera). Currently, there are seven zoom lenses in the Leica R lens line:
- Vario-Elmar-R 21-35mm f3.5-4 ASPH (made by Leica Camera)
- Vario-Elmar-R 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 (made by Sigma, Japan)
- Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm f2.8-4.5 ASPH (made by Leica Camera)
- Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f4 (made by Kyocera, Japan)
- Vario-APO-Elmarit-R 70-180mm f2.8 (made by Leica Camera)
- Vario-Elmar-R 80-200mm f4 (made by Kyocera, Japan)
- Vario-Elmar-R 105-280mm f4.2 (made by Leica Camera)
Your question was about the “main visible differences”. If you were to compare the very best zoom lenses from Leica, such as the Vario-APO-Elmarit-R 70-180mm, to the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM, it would be tempting to conclude that the Leica lens would yield images of as good quality or better than its Canon counterpart. IMHO, I think it’s more important to adopt a system based on your needs, and to stick to it (even if its zooms may or may not be the best). For some people, that choice means Canon or Nikon, for others the choice is Leica.
In fairness, I should add that those who decide to adhere to the Leica system are usually (I hope..) aware of its limitations, including zoom lenses – especially its zoom lenses! You don’t buy a Leica SLR because of its great and numerous zoom lenses. Leica zoom lenses are very good, and with proper use can produce images of great quality. However, if I had a need for a great many modern zoom lenses (17-40, 24-70, 28-300, 100-400, etc..), I would consider a more "modern" SLR camera, such as a Canon EOS.
Regards,
John F.
P.S. Did you have any specific Canon zoom lens(es) in mind ?
|
Ben Z (ben_z)
Intermediate Member
Username: ben_z
Post Number: 97
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 05:30 pm: | |
I have 2 Leica (well, sort of Leica)zooms, the 28-70 (ex-Sigma) and 70-210 (ex-Minolta). Both of them give very sharp, crisp imagery although the pincushion distortion from 50-70mm on the 28-70 is extremely severe and requires correction in Photoshop if there are any straight lines anywhere outside the central 25% of the shot. I wonder but doubt if these lenses are any different in performance from the Sigma and Minolta lenses with the same configuration. But I got them really cheap, and I have 21,35,50 and 90 Leica primes that I use most of the time. I've never used the later Leica zooms, I suspect they are better, but way out of my reach price-wise. I kind of bought the whole R shebang on an impulse because the price was too good to pass up. |
John Francis (john_f)
Senior Member
Username: john_f
Post Number: 1157
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2004 - 06:31 pm: | |
Other than the (VERY expensive) Vario-APO-Elmarit-R 70-180mm f2.8, both Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm f4 and Vario-Elmar-R 80-200mm f4 have often been reported as having excellent sharpness and color reproduction - and both are much less expensive than other similar Leica (prime) lenses.
The new Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm f2.8-4.5 ASPH is also said to have extraordinary imaging quality - but at a relatively much higher price. I got to use it for a little while a month ago. Fantastic lens!
 |
Bill Hollinger (billh)
Senior Member
Username: billh
Post Number: 2425
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 12:36 am: | |
Interesting information John. I agree, if you are going to use a zoom (maybe I’m simply old, but I see zooms as a compromise one chooses for convenience), you are better off buying the one make by the manufacturer of your camera so you achieve maximum usability. Now, if you want sharp.....Choose the Leica lenses!
I have the Canon 70~200 f2.8IS, and while I suppose it is not bad, I only use it when I absolutely must, choosing instead to use the Summicron 180, the Canon 185 f3.5 Macro, the Canon 85 f1.2 or 135 f2.0, or the Canon 300 f2.8IS, which is a superb lens. Now I need that 90 APO for me digital camera! Then I can be ‘all Leica’ almost all the time. |
Stuart Nordheimer (stuny)
Advanced Member
Username: stuny
Post Number: 124
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 01:07 am: | |
Gabor -
Very good advice above, especially as John F says, if you need a wide assortment of zooms then Canon may be for you. However, I've found the performance of my zooms, especially the 80-200 Leica, to be extraordinary, even when used with the current 2X adapter (have a look at the American Kestral at this link, that I shot in the first week of R8 ownership on Fujicolor 400 with the 80-200 and 2X adapter. The only weak link was my old HP 300DPI scanner: http://barbara-and-stu.com/Virgin%20Gorda%20Photos .htm). There is no doubt that zooms are easy, but their convenience should not be under rated. Frequnetly, pre-Leica and post Leica I've only caught some wonderful shots because I didn't miss the opportunity because of changing lenses, plus some photos I caught with zoom would have been impractical unless I had a wide assortment of the peerless Leica prime lenses. |
gabor ferenczy (gabor)
New member
Username: gabor
Post Number: 2
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 03:33 am: | |
Hi again!
thanks for reply. I havent bought Leica,but I would maybe R9+21-35,+28-90,+Apo180/2.8 or 70-180.Or canon eos1+24-70L/2.8,+70-200/2.8 IS.
I know the Leica not Af and Is ,but the drawings of lenses are there any visibility difference.
If I see the difference i dont interest canon and Af+IS. I always reading about how superb the Leica lens. Anybody shows me against Canon or Nikon? |
gabor ferenczy (gabor)
New member
Username: gabor
Post Number: 3
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 03:40 am: | |
Hi again!
thanks for reply. I havent bought Leica,but I would maybe R9+21-35,+28-90,+Apo180/2.8 or 70-180.Or canon eos1+24-70L/2.8,+70-200/2.8 IS.
I know the Leica not Af and Is ,but the drawings of lenses are there any visibility difference.
If I see the difference i dont interest canon and Af+IS. I always reading about how superb the Leica lens. Anybody shows me against Canon or Nikon? |
Ken Hambleton. Melbourne Australia (hamey)
Senior Member
Username: hamey
Post Number: 449
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 06:56 am: | |
Hello Gabor.
Some weeks back I wrote on this forum that I met this chap who was using a Leica 70-180mm 2.8 lens with his top end Canon Digital camera. I asked him why and his reply was because it's the best lens he has ever used and nothing in the Canon stable could equal it, but what made me sick is that he stated he would love to see Canon and Leica merge.
I QUICKLY MOVED AWAY.
They used to hang people for less.
Cheers.
|
Fly Guy (San Francisco) (fly_guy)
Senior Member
Username: fly_guy
Post Number: 1916
Registered: 01-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 08:29 am: | |
Merge? I'm talking "hostile takeover", baby!  |
Ken Hambleton. Melbourne Australia (hamey)
Senior Member
Username: hamey
Post Number: 450
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 11:32 am: | |
It did'nt work with Minolta nor would it with
Canon. They have different philosophy when it comes to Photography.
Leica lets the individual to concentrate on the essentials when photographing.
Canon believes their Cameras are so advanced and their technology has reached a stage were
the computers in their Cameras will select the individual Eye focus, Autofocus the Lens,
image stabilize it and select the appropriate Metering and just do everything else for you including E-Mailing lunch for you.
All the individual has to do is hold the computer-cam and not necessary steady, thanks to IS whilst the Canon-cam is processing the image. And with all this features at your fingertips you could very well become the Best Photographer of the year.
Cheers
|
Stuart Nordheimer (stuny)
Advanced Member
Username: stuny
Post Number: 127
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 01:33 pm: | |
Gabor -
One caution: don't fall into the trap of comparing specifications -- many people do that with audio gear and end up with less sound than they could have gotten since they are concentrating on measurments instead of actual first-hand observation. Many good camera dealers are willing to rent gear for a weekend. Perhaps you need to rent a Canon and lens(es) and a Leica and lens(es). You already know how I think the results would turn out or I wouldn't be on this forum. |
Derek Stanton (derek_stanton)
Advanced Member
Username: derek_stanton
Post Number: 147
Registered: 01-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 05:44 pm: | |
Ken, that's ridiculous. You can operate a Canon in all the same manual modes as any Leica. "Philosophy?" Leica adopts the same technologies whenever it's feasible. Unfortunately, it sometimes takes them thirty years to get there.
Even if you do choose Autofocus, you still choose which focus point. Or, you can focus manually, the same way as with an R. But, why do some people get an ego boost because they turned a ring to achieve focus? For my eyes, actually, racking my lens' focus ring back and forth is a distraction from my concentrating on the "essentials." But, then, i always thought THE essential was getting the picture.
How does Image Stabilization affect "the essentials?" How does the camera choose the metering mode? You can choose the same metering modes as any Leica. Or none.
What is this Canon "processing" you speak of? Can you recognize it in a photograph?
The "Best Photographer of the Year" would likely be the best photographer regardless of which camera was used.
I guess guys like James Nachtwey and Steven Meisel really aren't so talented after all. It's all the work of the computer.... |
Larry Okrend (larry)
Member
Username: larry
Post Number: 29
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 08:24 pm: | |
Canon cameras may have totally counterintuitive video-game-style operating controls, but don't underestimate the quality of their lenses.
Most of the L-series lenses -- primes and zooms -- are excellent, as are some of the "amateur" lenses, such as the 100mm f2.8 Macro and 50mm f1.4. On the other hand, Leica's build quality is much better.
|
Derek Stanton (derek_stanton)
Advanced Member
Username: derek_stanton
Post Number: 149
Registered: 01-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 10:39 pm: | |
The topic of "build quality" is something else altogether.
After working with leicas, you get used to that heft and feeling of solidity. But, to what extent is that necessary? Photographers take Canon lenses into wars. Leica users complain that a chrome 50mm lens is 50 grams heavier than a black one. Then, they boast that an M is half the size of an SLR.... Sometimes i get the feeling that it doesn't matter what the characteristic is - as long as it's different from the competition, the Leicaphile will rationalize it and proclaim it to be an advantage.
Build quality is nice, but at some point it's more a matter of pride than functionality. More important, it's what you do with it, isn't it?
Larry - i'm not arguing with you, but i wonder what it is about a Canon that leads you to characterize it as having "counterintuitive video-game style controls." For people who use them, there's nothing about an EOS that gets in the way of making pictures. In fact, the way i use them, they ENABLE the process more than anything else.... |
Larry Okrend (larry)
Member
Username: larry
Post Number: 30
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 08, 2004 - 11:49 pm: | |
Derek,
I own more Canon equipment than Leica equipment, but I won't make excuses for the "Johnny Jet" EOS user interface. It changes from one camera to the next and it often gets in the way of taking pictures. In fairness, the EOS interface works better with digital cameras than film cameras. There was never really a good reason for Canon to change a simple, direct and intuitive system on its film cameras to that convoluted mess of pushbuttons and menus. It was Canon’s way to gain market share over Nikon, and sadly it worked. To use EOS, you need to think like an engineer rather than a photographer. (For what it's worth, I have degrees in industrial design and photography, so my rant isn't totally baseless.) I'm perfectly aware that many, if not most people will disagree and that's certainly their prerogative.
As far as build quality is concerned, I didn't mean to imply that Canon lenses were poorly made (well, some are), but simply that Leicas lenses are better. Yes, they are overbuilt.
Lively debates are good!
Thanks,
Larry
|
Ken Hambleton. Melbourne Australia (hamey)
Senior Member
Username: hamey
Post Number: 451
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, December 09, 2004 - 06:37 am: | |
Ok Gents the jokes A-side.
Now may I speak on this magnificent book that I
have had the privilege to view by Photographer
Geoff Ross on New Zealand. Geoff uses Canon digital combining Canon and Leica Lenses and may
I say the photography like New Zealand is out of this world for those who love beautiful scenery
will love his work.The book is called NEW ZEALAND MAGIC. By Geoff Ross.
All colour, hard bound and I Think Geoff said the cost is 55 Australian Dollars.
Regards.
|
John Francis (john_f)
Senior Member
Username: john_f
Post Number: 1162
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2004 - 07:40 am: | |
Gabor,
To go back to your question of Leica vs Canon lenses. If as you say, you do not need AF or IS, I would have to say that - IMHO - Leica R lenses can produce images (pictures) that will be sharper, with higher contrast, better colour fidelity (i.e. more accurate colours), and higher image “brilliance” (the colors have more "life" to them). In many cases, the clarity is such that images will seem to "jump out" at you!
I know that some people on this forum are not entirely convinced of this, that we are either dreaming or kidding ourselves, etc…. I make it a point to try out Japanese made cameras and lenses every year (mostly Nik.. stuff I will admit). Some of their lenses are pretty darn good! A few come close to Leica’s level of quality – but there’s always that extra “something” that’s missing (but it’s getting closer all the time). And of course there are a few real bad ones … But all of that is just my opinion.
Gabor, you mentioned that you are interested in the Leica R9 and the Vario-Elmar-R 21-35mm, the Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm, and either the Vario-APO-Elmarit-R 70-180mm or the APO-Elmarit-R 180mm. May I make a few suggestions:
- Explain to your photo store/Leica dealer that you intend to buy a camera system from them, and that you would like to rent or lease a Leica R9 with either the Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm or the APO-Elmarit-R 180mm for a few days, in order to help make up your final decision
- Use the very best colour films with your Leica. May I suggest Fuji Provia 100F and Astia 100F colour slide film, and if you can, Kodak Professional Kodachrome 64 (code PKR).
- If you like B&W (excellent choice with Leica!), try Fuji Neopan 100 Acros, Agfa APX 100, Ilford Delta 100, with your favorite developer (or photo lab). Kodak TRI-X (either with D-76 or HC-110) is also an old favorite.
- Try to shoot familiar subjects (subjects with colours that you know very well) under different lighting conditions (cloudy day, very sunny day, early morning, late afternoon, etc...)
- Have the films processed by the best photo lab you can find (if possible, process the B&W yourself)
- Inspect the slides with either a very good magnifier (usually available at photo labs) - or if not possible, with a standard 50mm lens (BTW, have any of you ever looked at your slides with a 50mm Summicron? The results will amaze you!)
I could give you even more reasons why Leica lenses are so fantastic, with still more colorful prose, but what would be the point? It’s YOUR opinion that matters! And besides, I would not want to anger some forum members ... ;-)
Actions speak louder than words! Try out the R9 with some Leica lenses for yourself and let us know what you think.
Best regards,
John F.
P.S. About the APO-Elmarit-R 180mm f/2.8, have a look at this excellent web page: http://www.leica-passion.com/leica-R/apo-elmarit-R -180.html
|
Pascal Méheut (pascal_meheut)
Senior Member
Username: pascal_meheut
Post Number: 325
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2004 - 08:10 am: | |
I have to say I've done extensive comparison with Canon, Nikon and so forth in the last years, helping a friend who "tests" lenses (www.pictchallenge.com in French only unfortunately).
And I totally agree with John. I couldn't say better. |
john howarth [Hull UK] (masjah)
Senior Member
Username: masjah
Post Number: 440
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Friday, December 10, 2004 - 10:24 am: | |
Gabor
I agree entirely with John; he describes very well that which is very difficult to describe. The differences are not small or imagined (no Emperor's New Clothes stuff here). Leica gear is significantly more costly than the competition, and with much less in the way of "techno" facilities; I don't throw away money - I'm not that wealthy. But having first experienced real Leica lens quality with my Minilux, I just had to bite the bullet and pay up when I wanted to diversify into SLR photography. Rest assured I wouldn't have paid up if I felt I had any choice! I hadn't and I did.
But it does depend on your needs. It may be that you style of photography means that auto-focus and image stabilisation have simply got to be higher on your list of priorities - in which case, regrettably, Leica R cannot be for you.
But otherwise, do do as John suggests, and see if you can try things out. But, be warned, one shot and you're hooked, and it's a terrible, terrible habit you have to feed!
Best wishes.
John.
|
gabor ferenczy (gabor)
Junior Member
Username: gabor
Post Number: 6
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 04:41 am: | |
Dear John F!
I tried the R9 and 21-35, 28-90 and no more.
I liked it very much,because i felt i could take good pictures. thanks for the idea. I could work lot of outside in the freezy weather. I made city and family photos. I was very proud of it.I got a M6 also but it wasnt my cup of tea. I took lot of out of focused pictures.
What do you think about 19mm against 21-35mm and teles: 70-180 or apo180/f2.8 or APO 180/f2.
Thanks again
Gabor |
John Francis (john_f)
Senior Member
Username: john_f
Post Number: 1179
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 07:59 am: | |
Hello Gabor,
I am glad to see you liked the R9. The 21-35mm is a very good zoom lens, and the 28-90mm is extraordinary! Sorry to hear you missed your photos with the M6. Rangefinder focusing is not always easy.
Comparing zoom lenses with prime (fixed focal length) lenses is never easy. There is of course the quality issue (lens A vs lens B), but also the versatility issue. If you absolutely need a zoom that covers 21mm to 35mm, then I would say to get the Vario-Elmar-R 21-35mm. The Elmarit-R 19mm is a fantastic wide-angle lens. Optically, I would have to say that it is better than the Vario-Elmar-R 21-35mm set at 21mm. But as I said, IF you need a 21-35mm zoom lens, the answer is easy (get the zoom). Otherwise, I would suggest looking at Leica R prime lenses, such as the 19mm Elmarit-R, 28mm Elmarit-R, 35mm Summicron-R, etc… BTW, the old (and discontinued) Elmarit-R 35mm f/2.8 was an excellent lens!
As for the long teles, I had the chance to try out the APO-Elmarit-R 180mm f/2.8 for a very short time in early 1998. It is a truly extraordinary lens! Super sharp, incredible image brilliance, and with super smooth focusing (you have to try it if you can). Quite probably one of the two or three best lenses ever made by Leica. Personally, if I was buying a Leica R camera and I needed a (long) telephoto lens, this lens would be my first choice. The APO-Summicron-R 180mm f/2 was introduced in 1994, four years before the APO-Elmarit-R 180mm (1998). It’s quite possible that the experience obtained by Leica engineers during the design of the APO-Summicron was useful when designing the APO-Elmarit. I have never used the APO-Summicron-R 180mm. Forum members who have used this lens think very highly of it. Is it better than the APO-Elmarit? My answer would be that there are other issues which should be considered, such as weight and size, and the absolute need for the very high f/2 speed (not to mention price). It is possible to use the APO-Elmarit-R 180mm handheld without a tripod. However, both the APO-Summicron-R 180mm f/2 and the Vario-APO-Elmarit-R 70-180mm f2.8 are much heavier lenses, and most likely will require a tripod (or a strong monopod) to hold the camera and lens if one wishes to obtain the very best results from these lenses.
Therefore, my answer for the telephoto is similar to the one above for the wide-angle. If you absolutely need a zoom that covers 70mm to 180mm, then I would say to get the Vario-APO-Elmarit-R 70-180mm (or the Vario-Elmar-R 80-200mm f/4 if speed is not an issue). Otherwise, go with prime lenses. For practical reasons, my personal choice would go for the lighter APO-Elmarit-R 180mm, with maybe the APO-Summicron-R 90mm Asph or the APO-Macro-Elmarit-R 100mm as a second choice (two more extraordinary Leica R lenses!)
I hope that all this will help you. Feel free to ask more questions if you need help.
Regards,
John F.
|
Pascal Méheut (pascal_meheut)
Senior Member
Username: pascal_meheut
Post Number: 328
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 11:34 am: | |
To add my 2 cents to what John said, the 21-35 is a good lens and very convenient to use. But the new 19mm is far better optically and mechanically.
In the end and altough I regret my 19/2.8, I use the 21-35 exclusively.
The 70-180/2.8 is optically excellent as are the 180/2.8 Apo and the 180/2.
But the zoom is lens convenient to use: heavy, slow and stiff focusing... It is mainly a tripod lens when the 180/2.8 is a handheld lens.
So I've choosen to use both the 90/2 Apo Asph and the 180/2.8 (or the 100/2.8 Apo sometimes) instead of the zoom.
However, I shoot mainly spot cars with this equipment. A landscape photographer would probably choose the exact opposite : the 19/2.8 for top optical quality and the zoom for precise framing.
|
gabor ferenczy (gabor)
Junior Member
Username: gabor
Post Number: 7
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 10:08 pm: | |
Hi John F and Pascal!
Thanks for yours advices. It is very important for me to choose the best.If you agree me maybe the 28-90 the fix point because i need zoom also. It is convinient for family photos and others when i dont have time to change lenses.
I thought the 19mm is a old lens(it came out more than 10 years ago) and not better than new 21-35 which is asph. ASPH doesnt important? But this zoom slower than 19mm and 28-90mm at 28mm.I prefer 19mm if you offer it better than wide zoom. Other problem the big overlap. Yours opinions was convinced me about the 180/2.8 is the best for me.Maybe the 80-200 is looks to slow. You prefer 90/2 and 100/2.8.
The 28-90 isnot enough good at 90? 90/4.5 looks too slow?
Ones more thanks for your time.
Best
Gabor |
John Francis (john_f)
Senior Member
Username: john_f
Post Number: 1180
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, December 12, 2004 - 11:47 pm: | |
Gabor,
Actually, the Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm is best when set at 90mm. It is true that f/4.5 is slow, but that is a question of preference or taste. I would prefer a faster lens, but the 28-90mm is still a excellent zoom lens (IMHO, optically, it is one of the two best Leica zoom lenses currently available).
It is true that the current Elmarit-R 19mm is an older lens (introduced in 1990) and that it does not use "Asph" elements. However, I have to agree with Pascal that the Elmarit 19mm is still a better lens, optically (and also mechanically), than the Vario-Elmar-R 21-35mm. Eventually, we will see more "Asph" wide-angle lenses for the Leica-R.
As I said in previous posts, your choice of lens (zoom vs prime) all depends on YOUR needs. Ask yourself this question: which lens or lenses would I use the most often for family photos? The 28mm or 35mm? The 50mm? The 90mm? If you ask yourself that question, you might find that you really need only ONE lens ... (or maybe two)
About the APO-Summicron-R 90mm f/2, I would strongly recommend that you ask your Leica dealer if you could try it for a day or two. Fantastic lens! And so easy to focus. You really have to try it with your favorite film (try the Fuji PROVIA 100F and ASTIA 100F).
Finally, have a look at this web site created by Doug Herr, a member of this Forum: http://www.wildlightphoto.com/leica/
Lots of useful info on Leica lenses.
Best regards,
John F.
The superb APO-Summicron-R 180mm f/2 – a big and HEAVY lens !! (2,5 Kg)
Source: http://www.wildlightphoto.com/leica/180A20.HTM
 |
gabor ferenczy (gabor)
Junior Member
Username: gabor
Post Number: 9
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 01:13 am: | |
Hi John F!
I checked that site it was impressive. If i choose 90/2 and 180/2.8 it is worth considering buy an 1.4 extender. 90/2 or 100/2.8 ? Will the 19mm replace soon by asph version? BTW My outside pictures was blue in the dark side.Could i use filters? what do you use in general? Have you heard something about 35-70/2.8? I am getting closer to the right decision.and i get many-many good advice.
All The Best
Gabor |
Pascal Méheut (pascal_meheut)
Senior Member
Username: pascal_meheut
Post Number: 329
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Monday, December 13, 2004 - 07:28 am: | |
The 19mm will not be replaced soon as it is simply the best 19/20/21mm on the market.
You can use the 1.4 converter with the current 180/2.8 but you have to be sure you'll need it. Focusing is less easier and this is not as convenient as it could be to mount.
When it comes to 90 or 100, go for the 90 if you do not need macro capabilities. The 90 is smaller, lighter, faster to focus, more open and has even a slight advantages when it comes to color rendering.
The 35-70/2.8 is excellent, discontinued, hard to find, very expensive, bulky and heavy. You should go for the 28-90 instead. |
gabor ferenczy (gabor)
Junior Member
Username: gabor
Post Number: 10
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 02:13 am: | |
Dear Pascal!
The M series have wide asph lenses, thats why i thought they change the R series also. Really you use exclusively 21-35 against 19mm ? I know you use 21-35 zoom and 90/2 and what do you use between them? My favorites in this moment 19mm, 21-35, 28-90, 90/2, 180/2.8. I should choose 3 of them.
28-90 looks fix point ,but at 90mm/4.5 looks to slow. Maybe the 90/2 with 2x ext=180/4 isnt too slow and complicate to focus as you menthioned at 180/2.8? The 90/2 with 2x extender gives same performance like 180/2.8? What do you think?
Thanks
Gabor |
Pascal Méheut (pascal_meheut)
Senior Member
Username: pascal_meheut
Post Number: 331
Registered: 09-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 07:14 am: | |
The M seris have wide ASPH lenses but this is just a technology, no magic. One can have excellent result without it. And the 19/2.8 is as good as a lens can be. Do not forget that constraint are very different for wides between R and M: distance to film is not the same, M lenses are much smaller... So there is no reason to use the same solutions everywhere.
And yes, I do not use the 19mm anymore: I sold it. The reason is convenience: either I had the 19mm on a body when I needed a 35mm or it was the contrary.
But as I said, I'm using my R wide when I'm "in the middle of the event" so I prefer a slight loss in performance to missing a picture.
In between the 21-35, I use the excellent 35-70/4, sometimes the 50/2 and rarely the 28/2.8.
I would not go for the 90/2 with the extender. It won't be convenient to use.
In your case, I would go either for 19, 28-90, 180 or 21-35, 90, 180 (and maybe later a 50 or 60 macro).
And to choose, you need to know what kind of pictures you'll take. 19, 28-90, 180 is an excellent choice for landscape, travel photography and so.
21-35, 90, 180 is more for reportage & portrait.
|
john howarth [Hull UK] (masjah)
Senior Member
Username: masjah
Post Number: 443
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 - 10:03 am: | |
Gabor
I use the new 90/2 Apo Asph ROM with the 2X Apo Extender ROM, and the combination does give really excellent results. (The only caveat is that it needs to be stopped down a bit for best results when used close-up - say less than 2 metres.) If you are using fixed focal length lenses, then it's really not significantly less convenient changing to the 90 + Extender compared with just mounting a different lens (for example a 180/2.8).
The reason I got the Extender rather than the 180/2.8 was cost; I don't use 180 all that much, and I already had a 90/2AA.
However, I must stress that I'm talking about the Apo 90 and the Apo Extender. Several other forum members have commented that the performance of the earlier Extender is not at all in the same league.
Best wishes.
John.
|
|
